Tag Archive for 'Ian Macfarlane'

Why Rudd needs the CPRS to be passed

Published
by
Mark
3 months, 3 weeks ago
in Climate change and Politics
. 84 Comments

It’s become something of a race to the finish between the Liberal leadership spill and the CPRS’ passage through the Senate. I haven’t seen much discussion out there of the implications of a defeat for the ETS bill. Those who are assuming that Rudd wins either way might want to think again. If the anti-Turnbull forces succeed in derailing the CPRS in the Senate, Rudd could indeed call a double dissolution election. As I understand it, he would have to go to it on the basis of the unamended bill. Or present the amended bill another time early in the new year. At this stage, if the CPRS – as amended by the Wong/Macfarlane negotiations gets through – he has the best of both worlds. He can square the circle between claiming to be on the right side of the climate change policy equation and satisfying big business and whispering to voters in coal seats that the timelines have been pushed out, and compensation increased. So he gets both green (if not Green) and brown votes… While pointing to Liberal insanity.

The politics becomes more challenging if the Libs change leaders, particularly to Joe Hockey, and the CPRS bill is defeated. The Libs will then run on “job destroying new tax”, and while Hockey would have to explain why he was for an ETS one day and against it the next, they’re likely to play down the denialism and go with the supposed economic arguments.

Interesting times.

D-Day for the Liberals? (And the government’s CPRS giveaway)

Published
by
Mark
3 months, 4 weeks ago
in Climate change, Disasters, Howardia, Media, Policy and Politics
. 99 Comments

The Coalition are continuing their marathon climate change/leadership party room meeting after question time today. Clearly, agreement couldn’t be reached within the scheduled four hours. That’s significant in itself.

In developments so far, Andrew Robb has jumped ship, reports Bernard Keane at The Stump.

The government has made its offer on the Coalition amendments. Peter Martin has the text of Rudd’s press release. Writing in New Matilda, Ben Eltham characterises the deal thus:

Billions more taxpayer dollars will be sacrificed on the altar of making the emissions trading scheme palatable for big polluters.

It’s impossible to see this ‘bipartisan’ deal as anything other than a huge transfer from the household sector to the polluters, and one which, at least in the short term, will do nothing much to reduce emissions. The argument in favour is that it should be supported to lock in business and parts of the Coalition, in the hope that it can be improved over time. The argument against ‘pass now, improve later’ is put by Senator Christine Milne at GreensBlog.

In today’s Crikey, Bernard Keane described the CPRS as the worst ever policy process this country has seen. It’s a textbook example, as well, of how politics can completely derail the ostensible intent of a piece of legislation, except insofar as it continues to provide the government with a talking point or two on the actual issue (and that’s not much of an exception!)… So all eyes in the commentariat will now doubt be on the implications for the Liberal leadership. Ludicrous outcomes such as a Kevin Andrews ascension are probably outside the realms of likelihood, but then who knows with this mob?

The issue has certainly crystallised almost all the ructions within the Liberals and between the Nats and moderate Liberals. Continued resentment of defeat, the counter-productive relationship with the media, the tendency to tear down any leader who won’t play the right wing game in all its purity and nuttiness, self-delusion about electoral politics. It’s all there. And none of it is remotely rational in a political sense, or any other.

More to come later…

UPDATE [Ben Eltham]: Sky News is reporting that Wilson Tuckey has moved a leadership spill motion …

Update [Mark]: Tuckey’s leadership spill suggestion failed. Perhaps he shouldn’t rely on The Australian for an assessment of numbers within the Liberal party room.

Update [Mark]: The farce continues, as Coalition members get angsty over whether the meeting should adjourn for a dinner break.

Update [Mark]: I suspect what’s going on now is they’re trying to work out what spin to put on an outcome which is completely chaotic, because both sides disagree as to what happened. If Turnbull, as leader, says that the meeting has decided to accept the deal, it seems to me that all they can do if they don’t agree is to take up Kevin Andrews’ kind offer and make him leader. Or Andrew Robb. Or Tony Abbott or someone. But all the blather about legitimacy surely is just hot air, unless they’re prepared to actually dispense with Turnbull.

Update: Turnbull is giving a press conference, pointing to his strong leadership, and claiming that he’s saved jobs. The Twitter buzz might be as good as place as any to follow what’s going on.

Update: SBS makes about as much sense as anyone could out of the result of the meeting.

Update: What Turnbull should do now.